aa5874

I no longer accept IMAGINATION as a resolution. If I allow you to imagine your OWN history then we might as well shut down the forum and burn all sources of antiquity and make you run wild with imagination.

Now, please Identify YOUR RIF RAFF???

In Sinaiticus gMark, Peter was IDENTIFIED as one of the followers of Jesus by Multiple persons. It must be obvious that those who IDENTIFIED Peter as one the followers would have also known Jesus in the gMark story.

Sinaiticus Mark 14I really don't know how you do maths but you ought to know one can only ADD the numbers that were supplied.

What is the sum of 5000 plus 4000???

Now, in gMark 1.28 it is claimed the fame of Jesus spread throughout the region about Galilee.

Are you Not going to ADD the people of Galillee and the region by imagination???

In gMark 1.33 ALL the city was at the DOOR of Simon's mother in law house.

Are you NOT going to add the people of the City by using your imagination???

Do you NOT also imagine that FREE FOOD Jesus and his disciples were ALSO known by people who did NOT get any Free Food if Jesus and his disciples did exist???

Do the Maths.

The fact is that Jesus and Peter were WELL KNOWN in the gMark story and Peter was IDENTIFIED as a follower of Jesus EXACTLY at the very location where the Arrested Jesus was being Held, Yet Peter was NOT arrested and Not Tried like Jesus.

It is most logical that the Peter's Denial story is an INVENTION and has ZERO historical basis.

aa5874

I was once of that same opinion until I read the short-ending gMark found in the Sinaiticus Codex.

We have a MOST BLATANT forgery in the Canon, the long-ending gMark, and yet Scholars have refused to acknowledge the significance of the ADDED Interpolated 12 verses.

The short-ending gMark and the Long-ending gMark did NOT have the same author.

The short-ending gMark and the Long ending Mark are TOTALLY different stories because of the forgery.

The short ending gMark Jesus story was UNKNOWN to the Jews up to the time of writing.

NO-ONE had heard of the short ending gMark Jesus story even AFTER the Temple had fallen.

The short-ending gMark Jesus story, the secret Christ and Son of God, is COMPATIBLE with the writings of Philo, Josephus, Tacitus and Suetonius.

No-one knew of the short-ending gMark Jesus story up to c 110 CE or up to the time of the writings of Tacitus and Suetonius.

The INTERPOLATED gMark Jesus story is NOT compatible with historical sources of antiquity as soon as it was claimed the Resurrected Jesus AUTHORISED the disciples to PREACH the Gospel to every creature in the world supposedly since the time of Pilate or c 26-37 CE.

tanya

Thanks for that comment. Much appreciated.

I had thought, contrarily, just the opposite, i.e. that the absence of reference to any of "Paul's" musings, in any of the four gospels, suggests that none of those authors had ever encountered anything he wrote...

rizdek

Oh please, would you reconsider?

Let's don't do that.

The RCC probably already beat us to that, at least to a large part anything that contradicted their religion.

Well, it does with or without you allowing it.

Jim, Sam, Harvey, Larry, Sally, Rebecca, Charlie, Weyland, Zeb, Aaron...need I go on?

Right which makes me think that it's entirely possible that some folks standing around a fire might poke fun at Peter to get him going. According to he gospels, he was a rather high strung, intense person.

4000+5000=9000 But nothing says we should add those numbers.

Some of one group might have been part of the other group, if so, when you add you're double counting. IF 4000 of the 5000 were the other 4000 then the total fed was only 5000...4000 were fed twice.

Yes

Yes, it was a large door.

I imagine lots of folks turned out for these "dinner-on-the-ground" occasions.

Even fiction can be discussed as being possible, probable or likely, given the context. I can discuss how likely it is that Gandalf could kill the Balrog, given his powers and know, simultaneously, that it's all fiction. So in the fictional story of Jesus getting charged and crucified, I can consider how it might be possible that Peter was teased by some rif raf and a maid while standing around a fire while Jesus was being tried.

Duvduv

Yes but it also means the authors of the epistles never knew the the historical backdrop that preceded the gospels and no one thought to add anything later. For example, why didn't the later empire clergy change the word to Mary from woman in Romans? It's not hard and would have smoothed contradictions. Or added a sentence to Acts about visiting Bethlehem? A little could go a long way! I thibk this indicates that later clergy never believed anything was ever intentionally interpolated or changed from the texts they received, so they were not authorized to do so themselves.

aa5874

Whenever you speculate ALWAYS IMAGINE the Opposite to be balanced and to show that you are NOT biased.

Please imagine that you can add 4000 to 5000.

Please imagine that the people were NOT rif raf.

Please imagine that Peter should have been arrested like Jesus in the fiction story.

Please, Do NOT limit your imagination or else you will come across as ONE-SIDED, or Myopic.

Please, imagine that whatever you imagine is in error.

Sheshbazzar

Don't you actually mean that;
'In the short ending of gMark, the Jesus story was UNKNOWN to the Jews up to the time of writing.' ?
This would be that LONG ending variation of gMark, the one containing verses 16:9-20, no?
Which he did not, in the SHORT ending of gMark, which would have preceded the 'INTERPOLATED' LONG (with verses 16:9-20 being the latter added or 'INTERPOLATED' material) gMark as you see it. no?

Sorry aa, but as you originally wrote it, it is quite confusing, if you find my suggested emendations to be incorrect, or to misrepresent what it was you were intending to convey, please feel free to further clarify your argument. Shalom

aa5874

Well, let me clarify.

1. There was NO story at all of Jesus the Son of God before c 70 CE.

2. There was NO character whose name was Jesus who was called Christ up to the end of the 1st century.

3. There were NO Pauline letters at all before the end of the 1st century.

4. The Canonised short-ending gMark PREDATE the Canonised Pauline writings.

Sheshbazzar

And when do you believe 'the LONG ending of gMark' arrived on the scene?
Before, At The Same Time, or After 'the short-ending of gMark'?

Was the LONG ending of 'The Gospel which is According to Mark' added Before or After the Pauline Epistles or Acts was written?

Is there something you are trying to hide behind the employment of this qualification of finally being 'Canonised' in this or that order?

It seems that both would have had to have existed before being officially recognized, accepted, and Canonized.

What difference would finally achieving a recognized 'Canonised' status make as to when they were respectively actually first composed?

rizdek

Even fiction can be discussed as being possible, probable or likely, given the context.